Peer review reduces strength of claims of a wildlife market origin of Covid

Re:Peer review reduces strength of claims of a wildlife mark... by logic_beats_pro on Thursday July 28, 2022 @11:11AM (#32265405)

The origin story is still under debate? It's been known for 2 years that the Pangolin coronavirus was modified. Just under 97% of the the Pangolin Coronavirus matches SARS-CoV-2. What does not match? The Furin Cleavage Site. There are foreign inserts there (that aren't found in any other Coronavirus) which seem to make it more transmissible and deadly.

MSH3 Homology and Potential Recombination Link to SARS-CoV-2 Furin Cleavage Site https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fviro.2022.8348...

The study is a bit technical but a not-as-techincal summary can be found here https://nakedemperor.substack.com/p/lab-leak-theory-new-arti...

To summarize, a gene sequence from the Furin Cleavage Site found in SARS-CoV-2 shows up in a Moderna patent from 2016.

Don't take my word for it though, research it for yourself.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Peer review reduces strength of claims of a wildlife mark... by GuB-42 on Friday July 29, 2022 @08:12AM (#32275923)

Still under debate. That theory is indeed 2 years old, I remember seeing a video about it in the early days of the pandemic.

It hasn't been confirmed, not at all, proponents of the theory claim a trillion to one chance of a coincidence (19 bases => 4^19, a naive interpretation), but a lot of scientists disagree. I you said, research it for yourself. And by my own research, the hypothesis is unlikely, so I take it as a "no" until the "further investigations" are done.

[ Parent | on HN ]